WriterJerry Wald, Julius Epstein Release dateMarch 2, 1935 (1935-03-02) CastKay Francis (Amy Prentiss), Warren William (Gibraltar), George Brent (Terry Parker), Helen Lowell (Aunt Martha), Henry O'Neill (Harold Thornton), Russell Hicks (Major at Flying Field) Similar moviesRelated Frank Borzage movies
Frank borzage living on velvet
Living on Velvet is a 1935 American romantic drama film directed by Frank Borzage and starring Kay Francis, Warren William and George Brent.
One day, Terry Parker, an airplane pilot is in a plane crash that kills his family. He feels guilty for their death and feels like he should have died in the crash as well. Terry continues to get into trouble until his friend, Walter Pritcham, known as Gibraltar for his steady nature, brings him to a party. Terry meets the beautiful Amy Prentiss and they both fall in love.
Terry realizes that Amy is Gibraltar's girl and tries to leave Amy, but Gibraltar reunites the couple wanting Amy to be happy. Amy and Terry get married and Gibraltar gives them a house in the country on Long Island. Terry is unemployed for some time until he get the idea to fly commuters into New York.
However, Amy believes that Terry will not act responsibly and leaves him. Gibraltar tries to get Amy to go back to Terry, but she refuses. Terry is in a car crash and Amy and Gibraltar rush to see him. Terry and Amy realize that they do love each other and vow never leave each other ever again.
Kay Francis as Amy Prentiss Parker
Warren William as Walter 'Gibraltar' Pritcham
George Brent as Terrence Clarence 'Terry' Parker
Helen Lowell as Aunt Martha Prentiss
Henry O'Neill as Harold Thornton
Russell Hicks as Major at Flying Field
Maude Turner Gordon as Mrs. Parker
Samuel S. Hinds as Henry L. Parker
Martha Merrill as Cynthia Parker
Edgar Kennedy as Counterman
The New York Times remarked on March 8, 1935: "With all the advantage of a rather neat plot situation, some brittle dialogue and the presence of the amiable George Brent and the attractive Kay Francis, Living on Velvet dwindles off to an unconvincing and rather meaningless ending, which does its best, in one stroke, to destroy most of the interest which the picture had succeeded in arousing during the earlier scenes. ... It is not the fault of the cast that the picture does not merit unqualified praise."